1. PRELIMINARY EVALUATION SHEET
Quality of Summary My honest evaluation- Examples of strategies,
what was done well and good practices and skills
what was not of good that my group and I will put
standard? Try to cite into place and develop to
specific example and ensure a main production
moments from your video of high quality.
Quality of holding a shot Whilst filming we forgot to We have to use a tripod
steady bring our tripod along and when filming and we have
therefore quite a few of the gotten advice that we should
shots were very unsteady. never use the zoom on the
However between camera instead you move
the camera closer.
Quality of the framing of shots We have to ensure that Be more detailed in our story
each shot match up with boarding and scripting and
each other especially when check scenes after the have
there are reverse been filmed to ensure eye
conversations going on match is present throughout.
between the two actors. We Also we could use a tripod to
also have to work on our position to achieve better
eye match technique, framing shots.
between 1:18 and 1:30. We
could also use more
camera shots, for example
low angle shots to make the
one of the actors look more
intimidating.
Quality of shooting material The content of our shooting To improve our reverse shots if
appropriate to the task set- material was good although we had used eye match level
i.e. the content of your film the quality of the shooting to make it look as though
pre and post editing was was not. Most of our shots they were having a
consistent with the exam were consistent with the conversation, the shot would
directives exam directives for example look more natural. Also we
during the reverse could have improved by
conversations we managed filming from different angels
to stick mostly to the script instead of always being a
whilst still adding and front shot, this would make it
tweaking some parts of the more interesting and
film. We managed to shoot tensional.
an over the shoulder shoot
which worked very well at
0:57 to 1:02 and match it
with the timings at 1:03 to
1:07.
Quality of selecting mise-en- Our was not very bad, but it We could improve our mies-
scène including colour, figure, could still do with some en-scene the most, because
lighting, objects and setting; improvements, for example we could have lighting during
fitting our setting in to the the conversation, from this we
script further. We could could create shadows upon
have also used some characters faces and also to
lighting because we began create different moods. If we

2. filming during the day, we used lighting, our lights and
had some shots with natural color would be more
lighting, and some which we consistent throughout the film.
had shot when the lighting
had gotten a little bit darker.
We also should have
focused more on the
costume because if chosen
correctly it could have had
a further impact on the film.
We are happy with the
decision of what objects we
wanted to use which
helped set the scene.
Quality of editing so that Our editing was quite good However our editing could
meaning is apparent to the since we cut out a lot of have been taken a lot more
viewer unnecessary footage and further because we could
also some parts which were have made the shots flow a
not needed anymore. We lot more and also make the
also managed to entwine film a lot more smoother. We
and merged clips together could have also added music
by using added editing as some points in the film
techniques such as fading. were really quiet making
This improved the continuity some shots slightly awkward.
because it makes it more
easier for the audience to
understand the content.
Quality of using sound with The quality of the sound at When the actors were
images and editing the beginning was quite conversing the sound was
appropriately for the task set; good because we liked the unclear and grainy so we
sound of the passing traffic could have made the
as this is what we were speech a lot clearer and
aiming for because it louder, and also make sure
added a sense of there is no unnecessary
authenticity. background noises.
Quality of positioning and We defiantly need to work We could position our actors
movements of actors on our position and and continuously check by
movement of the actors looking at the camera
since it comes across as very footage to ensure we are
unnatural. We could have happy with the placement
also improved on the angles and arrangement of them.
that we used when filming Our actors could of been
actors that were in the smoother in their movements.
correct positions.
Quality of group planning, As a group of two, we To improve next time we
meeting targets, organization worked very well together, should write more detailed
and both contributed to all story boards, and potentially
of the tasks, for example, use actors instead of
the editing, filming, scripting ourselves to make it slightly
and also both of us acted in easier for ourselves to control

3. the film, and worked well. the film.
Group dynamics i.e. how did I think our group of two To improve we could of spent
your group work together worked well together. We more time story boarding and
were open with sharing and paid more attention to how
contributing ideas. We both and in what position each
contributed towards the shot will be filmed.
script, filming, acting and
editing.
Other points of evaluation The main equipment We could choose the set
(E.g. equipment related etc) problem was forgetting the where film to link more with
tripod which meant a lot of the plot of our film and assign
the scenes were very shaky what each person in the
with not much stability. The group will bring in to ensure
setting has to link more to we do not forget any key
the film as it seemed quite equipment e.g. tripod or
random and irrelevant due props.
to us tweaking some lines in
the script.